METHODOLOGY
How CallerScope assesses phone numbers.
An assessment separates possible harm, evidence strength and freshness. It describes reported calls, not the identity of a number’s owner.
Separate dimensions
Severity describes the possible harm of reported behavior. Confidence describes evidence strength. Freshness describes the age of relevant signals. High severity does not, by itself, establish high confidence.
Weighted sources
Evidence quality, independence and age matter. A verified or credibly supported source carries different weight from an unsupported anonymous claim. Several similar reports do not necessarily represent independent experiences.
Honest unknowns
Without enough eligible evidence, the result is unknown. This establishes neither safety nor wrongdoing. A familiar number on the display does not prove who made the call.
Abuse resistance
Duplicate and coordinated signals have limited influence. Disputes or number reassignment can pause publication. A historical experience must not automatically be attributed to a number’s current holder.
How to read a number’s evidence
Start with what the evidence actually supports. Approved report count, independent contributor count and source count are different measures. A total alone does not show whether reports describe the same event.
- Reported experience
- A contributor’s account of a call or message. Approval for publication does not turn it into an independently proven fact.
- Verified fact
- Information supported by its stated source or a specific verification. Verifying a business’s authority over a number does not guarantee that every call is safe.
- Derived assessment
- A summary of eligible evidence under the assessment rules. Its explanation should preserve uncertainty, evidence age and conflicting information.
Illustrative example
A report may describe a serious request for a banking code but come from a single unsupported source. The reported behavior may be serious while confidence remains low. This example is fictional and concerns no particular number.
Default assessment rules:callerscope-v4. An individual published assessment has its own version and calculation date; an older result may use different rules.
When a number page can be published
Evidence eligibility and search-index eligibility are separate decisions. Report count alone is not enough. A page needs a useful original summary, moderated public evidence, current context and a stable address.
- Empty and low-information results are not offered for search indexing.
- A dispute, privacy restriction or removal can limit or stop publication.
- The reserved-number demonstration is labelled fictional and is not a live report.
Assessments concern reported calls displaying a number. Caller ID can be spoofed and numbers can change holders. CallerScope therefore does not establish a caller’s identity or guilt.
Corrections and review
Use a correction request when information is inaccurate or its context has changed. Use removal to request a publication restriction, and an appeal to request review of a decision. Explain which information you dispute; never submit passwords or one-time codes.